A host State, depending upon the situation and circumstances, may approach the national court seeking an anti-arbitration injunction either before the establishment of the arbitral tribunal or once the arbitration tribunal enters into reference. The reasons, often, cited for seeking an anti-arbitration injunction can vary from admissibility issue to jurisdictional objection to prohibition of abuse of process. Jurisprudence on this issue is limited; however, it allows an understanding that some domestic courts inherently retain the jurisdiction to restrict the initiation of international treaty arbitrations which are oppressive or vexatious or cause severe prejudice to the legal process. The decision of the Delhi High Court in the Vodafone case brings forth some pertinent questions about the law and interpretation of the competence principle and the role of domestic courts in enjoining international treaty arbitrations. Noting the uncertainty that could result from anti-arbitration injunctions for the foreign investor, this chapter attempts to understand the scope of the inherent jurisdiction located within the national law. It also analyzes and evaluates the rationale offered by the Vodafone court and examines whether anti-arbitration injunctions could possibly lead to abuse of process.